Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Buick Lucerne Buick Lucerne: Engine & Performance
191 messages, Last post on Feb 03, 2007 at 9:20 PM
You are in the Buick Lucerne Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
| I know the merits of humble V-6 versus Northstar have been addressed in other threads. Here's my situation: I live in the Buffalo/Niagara area of western NY; the roads are wide, flat and often a bit rough; very few hills here and those that exist are gentle; most of the time, I'm the only one in the car; most cruisin' is 45 to 60 mph - rarely over 65. Given all this, I would think the V-6 would be sufficient; what do 'Lucerne experts' think? | |
|
|
|
Replying to: mark_wny (Jun 26, 2006 2:15 pm) I think the KEY word here is FLAT. I think the V6 will do just fine! IF you said , sometime encounter hilly terrain, then do as I do, put it in 3rd.(preventing useless upshifts to overdrive) and get a bit more aggressive with the gas pedal. Now IF you said STEEP hills often ,the V8, may have been a better choice. This is only my opinion based on driving the V6 (3800) engine for 12 years. As for "rough roads" the CX W/16" Tires has the most road isolation,and the softest ride.(Our choice) The CXL W/17" Tires comes with the V6 and cost $3,000 more, has leather, a bit firmer suspension,more ride control, with a bit more tire road noise, and a Luxury package is avail that includes "memory seating positions". But if someone wants the V8, it will cost 2,000 more, for a total of 5K more than than entry-level CX. Now it certainly IS a "premium" car with respect to it's performance. Be sure to test drive each one for at least 20-25 Min. Good Luck.
|
|
|
Replying to: loyalbuickfan (Jun 26, 2006 2:54 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: mark_wny (Jun 26, 2006 2:15 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: rceggl (Jul 01, 2006 11:18 am) I ordered a Lucerne with the V-6 but it will be interesting to see what percentage are sold with Northstar,yearly, I too care about MPG and fuel cost. Not all "state of the art" Variable Valve Timing V-6's are free from their OWN negative traits. The Hyundai Azera I tested had terrific power reserve, but mpgs are said to be dissapointing. The Toyota Avalon I drove seemed noisy at idle,and louder than expected when forced to downshift AND wants to be treated to premium fuel too. I remember at a car show 3-4 years ago at the Caddy area,a display that showed the inner cutaway of Northstar and went on to explain the great number of features of this engine,then GM'best. I recently found that this engine was quieter and I think smoother than those mentioned above and again the 4-speed auto was always willing.(GM don't introduce 5or6 speed trannys until you get it as right,and reliable, as you did here!) If the 3800 is a little low tech then it's durability and performance make up for that.(25+years=lots of improvements on a great design) In an earlier message I said that on the day we bought Lucerne we would have bought the CaddyDTS/Northstar choosing performance over economy IF it offered cloth seats. My wife and I loved the looks AND smooth power this Northstar equppied car offered! So instead I am 10 grand ahead, and am really looking foward to Buick #5. |
|
| I have a 3800 in my 2000 LeSabre and keep on reading how it is a low-tech pushrod design. On the other hand, I get about 23mpg in the city, 29 on the highway, get great power and quiet operation. So I'm wondering if the car mags want technology for its own sake. My Ford Taurus with its Duratec 16Valve V-6 gets about 18Mpg with less power than the Buick. If I traded in my LeSabre, I would get the V-6. The only problem that I have with the Lucerne is that it is so much heavier than the LeSabre that it might need the power of the V-8 to get the same performance as I get in my LeSabre. | |
|
|
|
Replying to: aalter (Jul 01, 2006 5:19 pm) I wonder if someone CAN comment as to why the 3800 went from 205HP to 197HP?Is it now measured differently? Dealers are more than happy to let you drive a Lucerne. It cost nothing but some of your time. Try more than one version.Let readers here know what YOUR impressions are!
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: loyalbuickfan (Jul 01, 2006 6:48 pm) Next the new Lucerne has been engineered with quieter exhaust that caused a HP loss of around 4-5 HP or so. And with the new HP advertising rules the actual HP must be reported which is 197. With the old rules it wouyld have been advertised at 200. I believe the LaCrosse still advertises 200 even since it was released before the new HP advertising rules went in force. In the end +- 3 hp is within tolerance of engine manufacturing. Also recall that GM had much tighter rules on advertising correct HP than the Japanese who almost invariably had to reduce their HP ratings by a whole bunch more (up to 30 HP I believe). |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aalter (Jul 01, 2006 5:19 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: dispencer1 (Jul 02, 2006 7:16 am) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Buick Lucerne Buick Lucerne: Engine & Performance
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Buick Lucerne
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
